The council’s Independent Remuneration Panel suggested cabinet members, committee chairmen and senior councillors to take cuts of up to 60 per cent in their annual allowances following a root and branch review of roles and responsibilities.

But rather than accept the recommendations, the cross-party council business management committee has claim the document is littered with inaccuracies and told the panel to take another look – meaning current allowances remain in place.

The report suggests that pay for the 40 senior councillors should be cut – with 18 per cent wiped from the total bill.

Chairman of the employment and human resources committee Coun Muhammed Afzal was asked to take the largest cut of £8,803, from his £14,803 a year allowance – 59 per cent.

Other losers in the report are the ten district committee chairmen who would have seen their £10,574 allowances slashed to £6,000, a 43 per cent cut, as well as the six Labour cabinet members who it suggests should lose £3,197 each from their £28,197 allowances.

Council Labour leader Sir Albert Bore, who would retain his £50,000 allowance, stuck up for his colleagues. He said: “I have some fundamental differences of view from that of the panel.”

He pointed out that many roles have altered under his administration – with district committee chairman in particular given cabinet level responsibilities for budgets and local services like housing maintenance and leisure centres.

He was backed by opposition Tory group leader Robert Alden who warned that further erosion of allowances would put councillors off, especially as some have to give up or wind down paid outside work when given a senior appointment.

He said: “We should not be returning to the situation where the only people who can take on council roles are either retired, have independent means or are sponsored by a trade union.”

Panel chairwoman Sandra Cooper told the committee that they had worked on the review for much of the last two years and are not prepared to reconsider the report.

And said they had considered the ‘level of responsibility, not the workloads’ of councillors.

However she said they would look at submissions for next year’s review.